The controversial discovery of 68-million-year-old soft tissue from the bones of a Tyrannosaurus rex finally has a physical explanation. According to new research, iron in the dinosaur's body preserved the tissue before it could decay.The ensuing debate then devolved into the usual creationist v science debate:
The research, headed by Mary Schweitzer, a molecular paleontologist at North Carolina State University, explains how proteins — and possibly even DNA — can survive millennia. Schweitzer and her colleagues first raised this question in 2005, when they found the seemingly impossible: soft tissue preserved inside the leg of an adolescent T. rex unearthed in Montana.
I have never been able to prove the Bible wrong. If I think something is wrong, I usually find it was my lack of information or understanding. I don't know that Everest existed, or if the atmospheric differences played factors. I can't turn my back on all the reasons I have to believe it's so just because questions arose that my own ignorance or the ignorance of man in general can't answer. I am not arguing with the Bible because I can accept and be at peace with not knowing everything about it right this moment.Completely frustrated I left the conversation for two reasons. Debating religionists is not my strong suit as I find it pointless and the willful ignorance of some is mind-numbing. And second, something about the initial story just wasn't adding up.
,,,
Faith allows me to trust what I don't completely understand. I understand enough to not turn my back on it. One day, I'll have complete understanding. And, for argument's sake, if that day is a lie, then I spent my whole life trying to be a better person and love others. Not a bad deal, I don't think. Again, my opinion is free. You don't have to take it.
A recent archaeological discovery that throws a wrench into the conventional theory of evolution has reportedly cost a California professor his job. Mark Armitage, a former scientist at California State University, Northridge (CSUN),,,A 30-year veteran in his field, Armitage has published many studies over the years in peer-reviewed journals.Regretfully my frustration got the best of me and I forgot about it, sort of,,,
[Note: In my initial reading of the attached article, I did not get past the first few paragraphs. Sorry to say that the said website associated with this article is pure bunk. I was unaware that they mentioned the Schweitzer research, "NC paleontologist claims to have explanation for soft tissue, but even this is just a theory." No it is not a "theory," it is a hypothesis; an explanation. This is not to say that Mr. Armitage does or does not have a legitimate legal case for religious discrimination, that is for the courts to decide.]
This story fills in a few more details from Armitage's POV. Again using the words "scientist" and "professor."
Although the following article delves into some of the possible legal ramifications; but again, that is not my interest here. I do however agree that the handling of Armitage's dismissal was poorly handled, as was his hiring as you will see.
Mark H. Armitage. Mr. Armitage is a microscopist; he's worked with microscope sales and services since at least 1984. When not involved in commercial microscopy, he is interested in scientific microscopy. He did undergraduate work without a degree in Biology at the University of Florida, he acquired a B.S. in Education at Liberty University, an M.S. in Biology (emphasis in parasitology) at the Institute for Creation Research, an Ed.S. in Science Education from Liberty University, and is a doctoral candidate at Liberty University in Science Educational Leadership.Part of an agenda?
He's managed electron microscope labs at the Institute for Creation Research, at the Creation Research Society Van Andel Creation Research Center, at Azusa Pacific University and at the Biology Department at California State University-Northridge (henceforth, CSUN). He was an Adjunct Professor at Azusa Pacific University and was at least some of the time an Instructor at CSUN.
In middle May of 2012, Mr. Armitage went to a dinosaur dig in the Hell Creek Formation of Montana. This dig was conducted with Dr. Kevin Anderson (fellow young-earth creationist) and guided by Mr. Otis Kline (also a young-earth creationist). The dig was being done expressly to find dinosaur bones to break them apart to find soft tissue. Pieces of horn, rib, and vertebrae, presumably from Triceratops, were discovered on this dig, and the specimens were studied at CSUN.A slip of the tongue,,,
Then Mr. Armitage's big week happens. He doesn't mention it in his lawsuit, but on June 7-9th, 2012, the Creation Research Society Board of Directors had their meeting, Mr. Armitage, as a member of the board, attended and talked about his less-than-a-month-old project. He was interviewed by a young-earth creationist podcast on June 8th, talking about his preliminary findings. That day, Mr. Armitage also appeared at the Rocky Mountain Creation Fellowship's monthly meeting identifying as a Biologist at CSU-Northridge, speaking about how scientific timescales must be wrong. This is relatively a lot of vocalism by Mr. Armitage about his beliefs, and possibly the most vocal he is about his beliefs since he was hired at CSUN.What I am curious about, Mr. Armitage was fired in February but yet waited until July to file his complaint. He is represented by Pacific Justice Institute, led by none other than Brad Dacus of Prop 8 fame as well as the debacle surrounding a transgender student at Florence High School in Colorado. If PJI was willing to file false accusations against 16-year-old Jane Doe, what is to prevent them from doing the same here?
Whether Armitage has an agenda remains to be seen. It is apparent that CSUN botched the hiring and firing, but would I go as far as Donald Prothero over at Skepticblog and suggest that Armitage is a "creationist mole?" Although I do wonder as to why he Armitage chose a "secular" institution.
Prior to his employment at CSUN, he was employed as a microscope technician at a variety of Christian schools. But he has no Ph.D., no formal training or peer-reviewed published research in the histology he was working on. He’s just a humble lab tech on a 2-day a week part-time gig, with no guarantee of employment from one semester to the next. His sole job is to maintain and keep track of the microscopes in a big department with hundreds of them, not to teach courses or do research.Prothero highlights this point of "credential mongering" by citing the 2009 L’Aquila earthquake in Italy. Comments also mention Kent Hovind, Carl Baugh, Ron Wyatt . A more generalized example would be that of David Brat who implied on his web page that he attended Princeton University.
,,,
So what happened here? It seems clear that Armitage was implying that he was a biologist at CSUN and that he was qualified to study histology and publish on it—all claims which are false, and abuse of his part-time position in an unrelated field. It is credential mongering and trying to get false credibility for expertise he does not have. That might be sufficient grounds for dismissal right there, even if Armitage hadn’t been a creationist, but just another employee using his CSUN Biology affiliation to promote himself and imply that CSUN Biology endorsed his views.
,,,
He was also a mole, with an agenda to undermine the teaching of science at a major university science department. If someone is dedicating his life to undercutting and destroying part of the mission of your department or institution, they are not qualified to hold a job in that department or institution. If you hire them, at the very least you are inviting them to use their affiliation to falsely imply that your department endorses anti-science, or even worse, to create turmoil in the department. Those are things you do not want from any employee, no matter what other qualifications they might have.
A comparison can also be made to the David Coppedge case, which also arose in California. Coppedge alleged he was fired because of his creationist views while his employer said it was because he repeatedly, and despite warnings, forced his views on co-workers. Coppedge lost.
But Prothero hammers his point home concerning the use of affiliation with the university to gain credibility, by citing the 1984 xenotransplantation of "Baby Fae."
If you were in a college astronomy department or research lab, would you want employees using your institution to claim that the earth is flat, or that geocentrism is right, as the Galileowaswrong.com crew are still advocating? If you were in a medical department, would you want an anti-vaxxer or an AIDS denier or a faith healer or a Christian Scientist in the department, undermining the health of your patients by peddling quackery? We’ve already had an example where creationist Dr. Leonard Bailey performed an unethical experiment in transplanting a baboon heart into infant “Baby Fae”, who promptly died. When asked why he didn’t use a more closely related animal like a chimpanzee and minimize immune rejection, he admitted he didn’t believe in evolution—and “Baby Fae” paid the price for his anti-science views.Only time will tell as to the outcome of Armitage's complaint. As comments again point out,"While it is early days in terms of fact development, if it is ultimately found that Armitage represented himself such that a reasonable person would have thought that Armitage held a position in CSUN he did not actually hold, represented as views of CSUN views CSUN did not have, etc., then this sounds to me like a stronger case for the employer than Armitage." [Ed. to correct name referred to.]
When asked why he had picked a baboon over a primate more closely related to humans in evolution, he replied "Er, I find that difficult to answer. You see, I don't believe in evolution."[www-bcf.usc.edu/~bwrobert/teaching/mm/articles/Pence2004_Ch14.pdf]
Scientist fired from university after discovering shocking dinosaur bones believed to be only 4,000 years old - NaturalNews.com
No comments:
Post a Comment